Expanding NATO Still Makes No Sense

For the first time in six years, NATO on Wednesday invited a new member to join the military alliance, prompting a heated response from Russia and further underscoring escalating tensions between the Cold War adversaries.

The latest addition to NATO isn’t as dangerous or provocative as trying to add members from the former Soviet Union or along Russia’s borders, but bringing Montenegro into the alliance is still a mistake. Montenegro adds nothing to the alliance, and will become one more ally dependent on the U.S. It will be another member that won’t do enough to contribute to the alliance, and it will make an already large, unwieldy organization even more so. There is no security threat that NATO will be better able to address because it has gained Montenegro as a member, and the alliance isn’t protecting Montenegro from anything because there is no threat to the country. This is latest expansion of NATO may be its most unnecessary one yet. Insofar as adding one more member to the alliance makes it harder to reach consensus on anything, further NATO expansion makes the alliance even less effective than it is now.

Russia is objecting to the inclusion of Montenegro as it always does with each round of expansion, but unlike proposed membership for Ukraine or Georgia I suspect that this expansion doesn’t really alarm or anger Moscow that much. They are denouncing it because they feel obliged to denounce any and all NATO expansion, but unlike with these other countries Montenegrin membership isn’t likely to set off a new crisis. That doesn’t make the latest expansion a good idea, but it is a less foolish than trying to continue the alliance’s eastward expansion.

MORE FROM THIS AUTHOR

Hide 12 comments

12 Responses to Expanding NATO Still Makes No Sense

I assume that to the extent Russia objects to admitting Montenegro, it is because Montenegro is a strong traditional ally. (Like all Christian subjects of the Turkish Empire, looking to Russia as protector from the Turks). But in terms of security, strictly a nothing burger.

Well, NATO bombed Serbia, and Montenegro has a strong Serbian minority (almost a third of the population). There isn’t the kind of animosity between Montenegrins and Serbs as there was between Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs, but I’m sure Belgrade is not looking at this favorably.

Since this provides no real benefit to NATO but instead adds liability and complexity, and since this represents an additional drain on the US, Russia is denouncing the move pro forma in public, but most likely celebrating in private.

I value and learn from your cautious skepticism, but I’m welcoming Montenegro. Rejecting them as an unworthy NATO ally is not the proper way to check ourselves against the dangers of home-fed militarism.

Montenegrins are basically Serbs, just like Kosovars are Albanians, just like Austrians are Germans. So let Serbia see that a small Orthodox Serb country can join Euro-Atlantic structures if it wishes. That will be more than likely good for America and Europe, including Serbia.

We are committed to millions of Europeans for good reasons. European cooperation is going to remain a major strategic asset for this country for a long time to come, especially as other global powers rise. NATO and European unity serve very well to strengthen our substantial common assets.

I don’t support the idea that NATO never should have expanded after the Soviet collapse. I’m not aware of any country in the former Soviet orbit whose accession didn’t bring protest from Russia, or who could have claimed to bring something truly substantial to the alliance. Individually they were and are comparatively feeble, and potentially dependent upon the wealthy Western democracies at NATO’s core. So none of them should belong in the club, and by that measure neither should several Westerners already inside.

Militant nationalist hawks agree with the generalized view that alliances are overrated. We can go it alone, at least in theory. Logically these are two sides of the same coin, because both views scoff–for different reasons–at little Montenegro types.

The only way what you say makes sense is if you don’t think this republic can contain its own militarism. But if that’s the case, then we should probably have no allies at all, at least until we get our own house in order. When the bumbling giant can’t handle a responsibility commensurate with its own strength, it becomes a danger to itself and others. Personally, I don’t think that America is there, even if it tests the waters of lunacy now and then.

It is the wrong conclusion that a country like Montenegro brings nothing more to the alliance then needy/greedy hands that clap as America burns itself out. Or is played for a chump by its cheapskate allies. That reminds me of Trump, and his accusation that foreign geniuses get us to pay for everything while they sit on their hands, because we’re so stupid. Our allies do get a bigger discount than they should, but that’s something in our power to stop. Why take it out on the allies when we’re the one spreading the cash around?

There must be a way to treat an ally/supplicant responsibly without rejecting them and the potential they offer.

“Our allies do get a bigger discount than they should, but that’s something in our power to stop.”

It’s an American imperial force, its policies and command by America, to further American strategic interests. America prefers to shoulder the financial burden, rather than relinquish the control not owning it would entail. The financial allocations reveal how committed the subsidiaries really are to its policies. That is, they only pay for what they think its worth to their own interests. You can’t just send someone a bigger bill and not expect they will consider it buys them more control. As the State Department’s Victoria Nuland put it while fomenting a coup to wrest the Ukraine into U.S. orbit, “F–k the E.U.” The United States will pay to continue to occupy Europe, and to even expand it, just as the Soviet Union paid for the allegiance of its Warsaw Pact satrapies.

Fran, thanks for rounding out the picture. While the comparison between ancient Persian vassals and Soviet satellites may be somewhat apt, it goes too far to compare either to what goes on inside NATO. I’ll continue to hear the dissent of a Larison, Bacevich, Finkelstein or Chomsky, and remain inclined to agree much more than disagree. But I won’t forget the crucial differences between a Western dissenter, and a dissident behind the Iron Curtain. Or the material reality of an Eastern European country inside the Warsaw Pact, vs inside NATO. These are very different animals, no matter how depraved of an empire America is constructing. I’ll stay grounded in the reality I know and study and have lived personally as a former refugee from the East. The US is better off finding the strength to maintain healthy alliances rather than rejecting them altogether for fear of its own power. There is an identifiable American interest in building a relationship with a state like Montenegro that has nothing to do with imperial proclivities, and Montenegrins too want a lot more from NATO than money or a military garrison. I’m no fan of Victoria Nuland, by my preferred solution is to minimize her influence, not to retreat from alliances. Either way, there is no perfect solution. My inclination is toward a strong US-European alliance.

A small article about a small country raises a big subject.
I think that sooner or later the Europeans will close the ring of NATO in the northern hemisphere. Great military – economic northern Euro-American alliance will arise.
Great Northern Empire of Europeans.
Only the logic of empires means decay, weakening, the construction of the walls, and finally death under the blows of the barbarians that being poor and uncivilized at the same time are very energetic and militant.
I reflect on the possibility of an economic reversal west and south that can provide more benefits and protection for Americans and Europeans.
Maybe it is time for the West to stop the race of consumption? Maybe for the West will be better if China, India and Africa could grow rapidly and become rich. They are so jealous of the west.
If the West will be smart enough to give the South and East of material well-being, it will slow down its demographics. West in return could acquire increasing the birth rate.
That means Life instead of death of the West.
Then defensive psychology of 20 – 21 centuries will be changed to new mentality of era great discoveries and conquests.